The creationists are BACK

[Skynet]

Exactly. I think we all can agree that the policy of our public education system is to get everyone on the same page as accepting homosexuality to be "normal". That's the problem. Indoctrination. That's where the state oversteps its place. The people determine how far the state is allowed into our lives. Not the state.

anyways this is a separate argument for another thread.

still if there is suppose to be a separation between church and state as established by the supreme court, why should a religious theory be taught in tax funded public school?

The USSC can change. There is nothing in the US Constitution that prohibits teaching creationism in schools that are tax funded. Those are judicial opinions.

the SCOTUS has ruled on the already.

The centrality of the "separation" concept to the Religion Clauses of the Constitution was made explicit in Everson v. Board of Education, 330 U.S. 1 (1947), a case dealing with a New Jersey law that allowed government funds to pay for transportation of students to both public and Catholic schools. This was the first case in which the court applied the Establishment Clause to the laws of a state, having interpreted the due process clause of the Fourteenth Amendment as applying the Bill of Rights to the states as well as the federal legislature. Citing Jefferson, the court concluded that "The First Amendment has erected a wall between church and state. That wall must be kept high and impregnable. We could not approve the slightest breach."

and it has been reaffirmed several times:

In 1962, the Supreme Court addressed the issue of officially-sponsored prayer or religious recitations in public schools. In Engel v. Vitale, 370 U.S. 421 (1962), the Court, by a vote of 6-1, determined it unconstitutional for state officials to compose an official school prayer and require its recitation in public schools, even when the prayer is non-denominational and students may excuse themselves from participation. (The prayer required by the New York State Board of Regents prior to the Court's decision consisted of: "Almighty God, we acknowledge our dependence upon Thee, and we beg Thy blessings upon us, our parents, our teachers, and our country. Amen.") As the Court stated:

In Epperson v. Arkansas, 393 U.S. 97 (1968), the Supreme Court considered an Arkansas law that made it a crime "to teach the theory or doctrine that mankind ascended or descended from a lower order of animals," or "to adopt or use in any such institution a textbook that teaches" this theory in any school or university that received public funds. The court's opinion, written by Justice Abe Fortas, ruled that the Arkansas law violated "the constitutional prohibition of state laws respecting an establishment of religion or prohibiting the free exercise thereof. The overriding fact is that Arkansas' law selects from the body of knowledge a particular segment which it proscribes for the sole reason that it is deemed to conflict with a particular religious doctrine; that is, with a particular interpretation of the Book of Genesis by a particular religious group." The court held that the Establishment Clause prohibits the state from advancing any religion, and that "[T]he state has no legitimate interest in protecting any or all religions from views distasteful to them."


if you want creationism taught in tax funded school, you need the courts to rule so. otherwise it violate the separation between church and state as i have shown.

 

[Jack Fate]

anyways this is a separate argument for another thread.

still if there is suppose to be a separation between church and state as established by the supreme court, why should a religious theory be taught in tax funded public school?

The USSC can change. There is nothing in the US Constitution that prohibits teaching creationism in schools that are tax funded. Those are judicial opinions.

Again, off topic. Show us where the constitution says schools can't teach a 6 year old how to use a condom, birth control and that being homosexual is natural for some (not normal for all, wtf).

I see where sex education in schools go too far and mainly I just don’t agree with public education… However creationism is not even a theory, and in fact I doubt it can even be taught without huge massive ugly glaring gaps that would leave teachers and students confused…

Nope. Not off topic. You tell me that religion belongs in church, yet you can't tell me where in the US Constitution it tells me I can't teach creationism in schools.

 

[Jack Fate]

anyways this is a separate argument for another thread.

still if there is suppose to be a separation between church and state as established by the supreme court, why should a religious theory be taught in tax funded public school?

The USSC can change. There is nothing in the US Constitution that prohibits teaching creationism in schools that are tax funded. Those are judicial opinions.

the SCOTUS has ruled on the already.

The centrality of the "separation" concept to the Religion Clauses of the Constitution was made explicit in Everson v. Board of Education, 330 U.S. 1 (1947), a case dealing with a New Jersey law that allowed government funds to pay for transportation of students to both public and Catholic schools. This was the first case in which the court applied the Establishment Clause to the laws of a state, having interpreted the due process clause of the Fourteenth Amendment as applying the Bill of Rights to the states as well as the federal legislature. Citing Jefferson, the court concluded that "The First Amendment has erected a wall between church and state. That wall must be kept high and impregnable. We could not approve the slightest breach."

and it has been reaffirmed several times:

In 1962, the Supreme Court addressed the issue of officially-sponsored prayer or religious recitations in public schools. In Engel v. Vitale, 370 U.S. 421 (1962), the Court, by a vote of 6-1, determined it unconstitutional for state officials to compose an official school prayer and require its recitation in public schools, even when the prayer is non-denominational and students may excuse themselves from participation. (The prayer required by the New York State Board of Regents prior to the Court's decision consisted of: "Almighty God, we acknowledge our dependence upon Thee, and we beg Thy blessings upon us, our parents, our teachers, and our country. Amen.") As the Court stated:

In Epperson v. Arkansas, 393 U.S. 97 (1968), the Supreme Court considered an Arkansas law that made it a crime "to teach the theory or doctrine that mankind ascended or descended from a lower order of animals," or "to adopt or use in any such institution a textbook that teaches" this theory in any school or university that received public funds. The court's opinion, written by Justice Abe Fortas, ruled that the Arkansas law violated "the constitutional prohibition of state laws respecting an establishment of religion or prohibiting the free exercise thereof. The overriding fact is that Arkansas' law selects from the body of knowledge a particular segment which it proscribes for the sole reason that it is deemed to conflict with a particular religious doctrine; that is, with a particular interpretation of the Book of Genesis by a particular religious group." The court held that the Establishment Clause prohibits the state from advancing any religion, and that "[T]he state has no legitimate interest in protecting any or all religions from views distasteful to them."


if you want creationism taught in tax funded school, you need the courts to rule so. otherwise it violate the separation between church and state as i have shown.

We can change that. We can take Federal government control out of education. When did the Feds take over public education?

 

[Skynet]

The USSC can change. There is nothing in the US Constitution that prohibits teaching creationism in schools that are tax funded. Those are judicial opinions.

Again, off topic. Show us where the constitution says schools can't teach a 6 year old how to use a condom, birth control and that being homosexual is natural for some (not normal for all, wtf).

I see where sex education in schools go too far and mainly I just don’t agree with public education… However creationism is not even a theory, and in fact I doubt it can even be taught without huge massive ugly glaring gaps that would leave teachers and students confused…

Nope. Not off topic. You tell me that religion belongs in church, yet you can't tell me where in the US Constitution it tells me I can't teach creationism in schools.

you and your constitution argument. there are a ton of things not in the constitution verbatim. hence why the founding fathers created the SCOTUS to interpret our laws and the constitution.

 

[Jack Fate]

Again, off topic. Show us where the constitution says schools can't teach a 6 year old how to use a condom, birth control and that being homosexual is natural for some (not normal for all, wtf).

I see where sex education in schools go too far and mainly I just don’t agree with public education… However creationism is not even a theory, and in fact I doubt it can even be taught without huge massive ugly glaring gaps that would leave teachers and students confused…

Nope. Not off topic. You tell me that religion belongs in church, yet you can't tell me where in the US Constitution it tells me I can't teach creationism in schools.

you and your constitution argument. there are a ton of things not in the constitution verbatim. hence why the founding fathers created the SCOTUS to interpret our laws and the constitution.

I understand that. SCOTUS can change their interpretations. That's what the left is scared to death of.

 

[Skynet]

The USSC can change. There is nothing in the US Constitution that prohibits teaching creationism in schools that are tax funded. Those are judicial opinions.

the SCOTUS has ruled on the already.

The centrality of the "separation" concept to the Religion Clauses of the Constitution was made explicit in Everson v. Board of Education, 330 U.S. 1 (1947), a case dealing with a New Jersey law that allowed government funds to pay for transportation of students to both public and Catholic schools. This was the first case in which the court applied the Establishment Clause to the laws of a state, having interpreted the due process clause of the Fourteenth Amendment as applying the Bill of Rights to the states as well as the federal legislature. Citing Jefferson, the court concluded that "The First Amendment has erected a wall between church and state. That wall must be kept high and impregnable. We could not approve the slightest breach."

and it has been reaffirmed several times:

In 1962, the Supreme Court addressed the issue of officially-sponsored prayer or religious recitations in public schools. In Engel v. Vitale, 370 U.S. 421 (1962), the Court, by a vote of 6-1, determined it unconstitutional for state officials to compose an official school prayer and require its recitation in public schools, even when the prayer is non-denominational and students may excuse themselves from participation. (The prayer required by the New York State Board of Regents prior to the Court's decision consisted of: "Almighty God, we acknowledge our dependence upon Thee, and we beg Thy blessings upon us, our parents, our teachers, and our country. Amen.") As the Court stated:

In Epperson v. Arkansas, 393 U.S. 97 (1968), the Supreme Court considered an Arkansas law that made it a crime "to teach the theory or doctrine that mankind ascended or descended from a lower order of animals," or "to adopt or use in any such institution a textbook that teaches" this theory in any school or university that received public funds. The court's opinion, written by Justice Abe Fortas, ruled that the Arkansas law violated "the constitutional prohibition of state laws respecting an establishment of religion or prohibiting the free exercise thereof. The overriding fact is that Arkansas' law selects from the body of knowledge a particular segment which it proscribes for the sole reason that it is deemed to conflict with a particular religious doctrine; that is, with a particular interpretation of the Book of Genesis by a particular religious group." The court held that the Establishment Clause prohibits the state from advancing any religion, and that "[T]he state has no legitimate interest in protecting any or all religions from views distasteful to them."


if you want creationism taught in tax funded school, you need the courts to rule so. otherwise it violate the separation between church and state as i have shown.

We can change that. We can take Federal government control out of education. When did the Feds take over public education?

Educational rights has to be determined by interpreting parts of the Constitution that deal with protection of individual rights such as the 14th Amendment and U.S. Supreme Court decisions.

 

[Skynet]

The USSC can change. There is nothing in the US Constitution that prohibits teaching creationism in schools that are tax funded. Those are judicial opinions.

Again, off topic. Show us where the constitution says schools can't teach a 6 year old how to use a condom, birth control and that being homosexual is natural for some (not normal for all, wtf).

I see where sex education in schools go too far and mainly I just don’t agree with public education… However creationism is not even a theory, and in fact I doubt it can even be taught without huge massive ugly glaring gaps that would leave teachers and students confused…

Nope. Not off topic. You tell me that religion belongs in church, yet you can't tell me where in the US Constitution it tells me I can't teach creationism in schools.

actually i did several times. you just fail to recognize it. i cant help if you stupid.

 

[Skynet]

In Epperson v. Arkansas, 393 U.S. 97 (1968), the Supreme Court considered an Arkansas law that made it a crime "to teach the theory or doctrine that mankind ascended or descended from a lower order of animals," or "to adopt or use in any such institution a textbook that teaches" this theory in any school or university that received public funds. The court's opinion, written by Justice Abe Fortas, ruled that the Arkansas law violated "the constitutional prohibition of state laws respecting an establishment of religion or prohibiting the free exercise thereof. The overriding fact is that Arkansas' law selects from the body of knowledge a particular segment which it proscribes for the sole reason that it is deemed to conflict with a particular religious doctrine; that is, with a particular interpretation of the Book of Genesis by a particular religious group." The court held that the Establishment Clause prohibits the state from advancing any religion, and that "[T]he state has no legitimate interest in protecting any or all religions from views distasteful to them.

HERE IS YOUR PROOF WHETHER YOU RECOGNIZE IT OR NOT.

 

[SillyWabbit]

The USSC can change. There is nothing in the US Constitution that prohibits teaching creationism in schools that are tax funded. Those are judicial opinions.

Again, off topic. Show us where the constitution says schools can't teach a 6 year old how to use a condom, birth control and that being homosexual is natural for some (not normal for all, wtf).

I see where sex education in schools go too far and mainly I just don’t agree with public education… However creationism is not even a theory, and in fact I doubt it can even be taught without huge massive ugly glaring gaps that would leave teachers and students confused…

Nope. Not off topic. You tell me that religion belongs in church, yet you can't tell me where in the US Constitution it tells me I can't teach creationism in schools.

There is no place in the US consitution where it says creationism can't be taught in public schools. There's also no place in the US consitution where it says a man can't slam a car door on his willy. There are somethings that we don't need the consutution to tell us just ain't right.

 

[Skynet]

i see Jack Fate has run home with his tail between his legs again.....

 

[Jack Fate]

the SCOTUS has ruled on the already.

The centrality of the "separation" concept to the Religion Clauses of the Constitution was made explicit in Everson v. Board of Education, 330 U.S. 1 (1947), a case dealing with a New Jersey law that allowed government funds to pay for transportation of students to both public and Catholic schools. This was the first case in which the court applied the Establishment Clause to the laws of a state, having interpreted the due process clause of the Fourteenth Amendment as applying the Bill of Rights to the states as well as the federal legislature. Citing Jefferson, the court concluded that "The First Amendment has erected a wall between church and state. That wall must be kept high and impregnable. We could not approve the slightest breach."

and it has been reaffirmed several times:

In 1962, the Supreme Court addressed the issue of officially-sponsored prayer or religious recitations in public schools. In Engel v. Vitale, 370 U.S. 421 (1962), the Court, by a vote of 6-1, determined it unconstitutional for state officials to compose an official school prayer and require its recitation in public schools, even when the prayer is non-denominational and students may excuse themselves from participation. (The prayer required by the New York State Board of Regents prior to the Court's decision consisted of: "Almighty God, we acknowledge our dependence upon Thee, and we beg Thy blessings upon us, our parents, our teachers, and our country. Amen.") As the Court stated:

In Epperson v. Arkansas, 393 U.S. 97 (1968), the Supreme Court considered an Arkansas law that made it a crime "to teach the theory or doctrine that mankind ascended or descended from a lower order of animals," or "to adopt or use in any such institution a textbook that teaches" this theory in any school or university that received public funds. The court's opinion, written by Justice Abe Fortas, ruled that the Arkansas law violated "the constitutional prohibition of state laws respecting an establishment of religion or prohibiting the free exercise thereof. The overriding fact is that Arkansas' law selects from the body of knowledge a particular segment which it proscribes for the sole reason that it is deemed to conflict with a particular religious doctrine; that is, with a particular interpretation of the Book of Genesis by a particular religious group." The court held that the Establishment Clause prohibits the state from advancing any religion, and that "[T]he state has no legitimate interest in protecting any or all religions from views distasteful to them."


if you want creationism taught in tax funded school, you need the courts to rule so. otherwise it violate the separation between church and state as i have shown.

We can change that. We can take Federal government control out of education. When did the Feds take over public education?

Educational rights has to be determined by interpreting parts of the Constitution that deal with protection of individual rights such as the 14th Amendment and U.S. Supreme Court decisions.

Nope. No such thing as "educational rights" and they are not determined by the Feds. We don't get any rights from government.

 

[Avorysuds]

The USSC can change. There is nothing in the US Constitution that prohibits teaching creationism in schools that are tax funded. Those are judicial opinions.

Again, off topic. Show us where the constitution says schools can't teach a 6 year old how to use a condom, birth control and that being homosexual is natural for some (not normal for all, wtf).

I see where sex education in schools go too far and mainly I just don’t agree with public education… However creationism is not even a theory, and in fact I doubt it can even be taught without huge massive ugly glaring gaps that would leave teachers and students confused…

Nope. Not off topic. You tell me that religion belongs in church, yet you can't tell me where in the US Constitution it tells me I can't teach creationism in schools.

First I didn't say religion belongs in church not schools and secondly creationism can be taught in schools but it's deeply flawed, fake, not real and has zero proof so a school would be hard pressed to teach such a shallow subject.

BTW, you didn't show where the constitution says we can't teach can't teach birth controll and homosexuality in schools.

 

[Skynet]

We can change that. We can take Federal government control out of education. When did the Feds take over public education?

Educational rights has to be determined by interpreting parts of the Constitution that deal with protection of individual rights such as the 14th Amendment and U.S. Supreme Court decisions.

Nope. No such thing as "educational rights" and they are not determined by the Feds. We don't get any rights from government.

so are you gonna continue to ignore that fact the supreme court has ruled you cant teach creationism in school?

and rights are determined by the Constitution. the constitution is interpreted by the supreme court. and the supreme court has ruled that everyone has a right to an education. so you are correct in that the fed didnt make the decision. but the supreme court has ruled on it. apparently you are a failure of that education system.

 

[Robert]

A little background. We have had many school boards in Georgia cave in to the religous whackos in the last decade over putting labels on all Biology books concerning evolution.
"Evolution is a theory only and there are other theories that are in the scientific community concerning the origins of life" type BS was on all Biology in many school districts.
I know, this stuff is so crazy but remember we are in Georgia where folks would believe the Spaghetti Monster is to be worshipped first and foremost if their preacher or Republican representative told them so. Science be damned.
Well sports fans, the creationists are backagain under the disguise of "intelligent design" claiming that there beliefs are science.
Now anyone with just a high school education knows full well, yet many will not publicly admit it because of worrying about getting the business in Sunday school, that creationism and intelligent design is not science but they keep plowing forward even if it is with a one legged mule after the Dover Pa. case.
Yesterday our Governor Sonny "Doesn't" Perdue announced that he, and his power house Republican buddies in the Legislature, want to make the State School Superintendent an appointed position. The religous right is behind it. Evolution is and has been their main target.
More to come folks.

Amazing really I believe in in neither of the two dogma's for one very simple reason neither of you can prove the existence or the lack of evidence of the others belief.

Its all conjecture and theory. The very same can be and is being said of the Big Bang Theory. Both are theory's neither can be proven one way or the other.

Until there is some sort of proof you're both idiot's

 

[SillyWabbit]

If one wishes to teach creationism in public schools, that's fine. Teach children about creationism in the same way you would teach them about any other mythology. You know, like teaching them about some tribe who believes a tree toad is the most sacred being on the earth and that if you kill one your head will explode. Like that. See?

 

[Jack Fate]

Again, off topic. Show us where the constitution says schools can't teach a 6 year old how to use a condom, birth control and that being homosexual is natural for some (not normal for all, wtf).

I see where sex education in schools go too far and mainly I just don’t agree with public education… However creationism is not even a theory, and in fact I doubt it can even be taught without huge massive ugly glaring gaps that would leave teachers and students confused…

Nope. Not off topic. You tell me that religion belongs in church, yet you can't tell me where in the US Constitution it tells me I can't teach creationism in schools.

First I didn't say religion belongs in church not schools and secondly creationism can be taught in schools but it's deeply flawed, fake, not real and has zero proof so a school would be hard pressed to teach such a shallow subject.

BTW, you didn't show where the constitution says we can't teach can't teach birth controll and homosexuality in schools.

It's your opinion that it's deeply flawed, etc. Give others the same rights you have.

 

[Jack Fate]

Educational rights has to be determined by interpreting parts of the Constitution that deal with protection of individual rights such as the 14th Amendment and U.S. Supreme Court decisions.

Nope. No such thing as "educational rights" and they are not determined by the Feds. We don't get any rights from government.

so are you gonna continue to ignore that fact the supreme court has ruled you cant teach creationism in school?

and rights are determined by the Constitution. the constitution is interpreted by the supreme court. and the supreme court has ruled that everyone has a right to an education. so you are correct in that the fed didnt make the decision. but the supreme court has ruled on it. apparently you are a failure of that education system.

Education is not a right. Health care is not a right.

You lost the argument when you said this: "apparently you are a failure of that education system."

Looks like you ran out of talking points and had to resort to a personal insult. That makes you a loser.

 

[Dr Grump]

A little background. We have had many school boards in Georgia cave in to the religous whackos in the last decade over putting labels on all Biology books concerning evolution.
"Evolution is a theory only and there are other theories that are in the scientific community concerning the origins of life" type BS was on all Biology in many school districts.
I know, this stuff is so crazy but remember we are in Georgia where folks would believe the Spaghetti Monster is to be worshipped first and foremost if their preacher or Republican representative told them so. Science be damned.
Well sports fans, the creationists are backagain under the disguise of "intelligent design" claiming that there beliefs are science.
Now anyone with just a high school education knows full well, yet many will not publicly admit it because of worrying about getting the business in Sunday school, that creationism and intelligent design is not science but they keep plowing forward even if it is with a one legged mule after the Dover Pa. case.
Yesterday our Governor Sonny "Doesn't" Perdue announced that he, and his power house Republican buddies in the Legislature, want to make the State School Superintendent an appointed position. The religous right is behind it. Evolution is and has been their main target.
More to come folks.

Amazing really I believe in in neither of the two dogma's for one very simple reason neither of you can prove the existence or the lack of evidence of the others belief.

Its all conjecture and theory. The very same can be and is being said of the Big Bang Theory. Both are theory's neither can be proven one way or the other.

Until there is some sort of proof you're both idiot's

Actually, once again you are wrong.

Several of those 'theory's' have been tested and proven to be correct - not all however.

Creationism is based purely on faith. Nothing more. There is no empherical or iota of evidence that a god created the Earth/Universe or whatever...

 

[Skynet]

Nope. No such thing as "educational rights" and they are not determined by the Feds. We don't get any rights from government.

so are you gonna continue to ignore that fact the supreme court has ruled you cant teach creationism in school?

and rights are determined by the Constitution. the constitution is interpreted by the supreme court. and the supreme court has ruled that everyone has a right to an education. so you are correct in that the fed didnt make the decision. but the supreme court has ruled on it. apparently you are a failure of that education system.

Education is not a right. Health care is not a right.

You lost the argument when you said this: "apparently you are a failure of that education system."

Looks like you ran out of talking points and had to resort to a personal insult. That makes you a loser.

just because you fail to accept them as rights doesnt mean they arent rights. they have been ruled to be rights by the courts.

and yes courts can give you rights. blacks and women didnt used to have voting rights, or the ability to own land, or hold public office. but they were given to them by the government and the courts. your argument is invalid.... again

you probably think freedom of speech isnt a right, nor is the right to privacy, or the right to choose. yet all of these things have been determined to be rights.

 

[Robert]

A little background. We have had many school boards in Georgia cave in to the religous whackos in the last decade over putting labels on all Biology books concerning evolution.
"Evolution is a theory only and there are other theories that are in the scientific community concerning the origins of life" type BS was on all Biology in many school districts.
I know, this stuff is so crazy but remember we are in Georgia where folks would believe the Spaghetti Monster is to be worshipped first and foremost if their preacher or Republican representative told them so. Science be damned.
Well sports fans, the creationists are backagain under the disguise of "intelligent design" claiming that there beliefs are science.
Now anyone with just a high school education knows full well, yet many will not publicly admit it because of worrying about getting the business in Sunday school, that creationism and intelligent design is not science but they keep plowing forward even if it is with a one legged mule after the Dover Pa. case.
Yesterday our Governor Sonny "Doesn't" Perdue announced that he, and his power house Republican buddies in the Legislature, want to make the State School Superintendent an appointed position. The religous right is behind it. Evolution is and has been their main target.
More to come folks.

Amazing really I believe in in neither of the two dogma's for one very simple reason neither of you can prove the existence or the lack of evidence of the others belief.

Its all conjecture and theory. The very same can be and is being said of the Big Bang Theory. Both are theory's neither can be proven one way or the other.

Until there is some sort of proof you're both idiot's

Actually, once again you are wrong.

Several of those 'theory's' have been tested and proven to be correct - not all however.

Creationism is based purely on faith. Nothing more. There is no empherical or iota of evidence that a god created the Earth/Universe or whatever...

No idiot it has not been Proven its a theory and theory only your Propaganda is not proof nor are talking point's from your political leaders. Good grief is this what passes for intelligence.